There is a FB argument between two Christians who I find rather tiring. One is saying "Tolerance is not a Christian virtue." The other is insisting that it is, while acknowledging that the word itself does not appear in the Scriptures, and his wife jumps in to state even more emphatically that of course it is, quoting Bible verses in a proof-text fashion.
It looks like a clear problem of definition to me. By some definitions of tolerance, such as tolerating sin within the congregation, or tolerating the teaching or sin, the first man is of course correct. In terms of putting up with differences and difficulties from others, especially within the Church, the second man is correct. A mediated or refereed discussion between Christians who desired to live together in harmony could find points of agreement rather quickly, but neither seems interested. One is a State Rep and the other is a college history professor, so they both feel they have territory to claim and protect for the sake of others who might be led astray.
You see why I find this tiring. When disputatnts cannot acknowledge that they are at least in part arguing definitions and relent at least to the point that the other has a point according to his own definition, I find that one or both is trying to smuggle in other ideas with their definition. In current America, this is usually trying to add in some favorite political or cultural idea in disguise. At its worst it can insist that patriotism is the same as Christianity, or that socialism is the same as Christianity if one will only squint hard enough and count a second cousin as a sibling.
Duelling Motte-and-Bailey arguments, both attempting to claim territory they cannot fully defend on the basis of narrower claims that they can.
No comments:
Post a Comment